Motorists' Rights.. Matter!http://www.motoristrights.com/index.htmlHot News!enencdornsife@bhspi.orgCopyright 2009 bhspi.org2010-04-23T10:44:36-07:00hourly12000-01-01T12:00+00:00Thu, 22 Sep 2016 07:35:51 -0700Colter's Guide to the Police States of America!cdornsife@bhspi.orgDue process, speed traps, traffic engineering, traffic studies, 85th percentile speed2010-04-23T10:44:36-07:00http://www.motoristrights.com/blog/files/82c3fd6fff1b88ec17545b3c84c0b39f-14.html#unique-entry-id-14http://www.motoristrights.com/blog/files/82c3fd6fff1b88ec17545b3c84c0b39f-14.html#unique-entry-id-14Early in his project, we also agreed to participate in his Speed Trap Challenge, where we will pay 10,000 dollars to the first person who can show us a single speed limit in the Untied States that is properly set, where the exercise of police powers for routine speed limit traffic stops is based on factual probable cause(s), and their court adjudication practices meets all the governing constitutional protections, including substantive and procedural due process etc.

...The reason for this will come as a surprise to most, the U.S. Constitution, Article 1§8 (1) national defense; (3) commerce;(7) post roads (transportation regulation); and (18)... necessary and proper (clause)[1] were symbiotic Constitutional powers our Founding Fathers deemed essential for the General Welfare of the Nation and they delegated their oversight to Congress; thus they’re not powers enumerated to States in the 10th Amendment.

Federal Regulatory Supremacy in this Field became incontrovertible when Congress invoked its Commerce Clause authority in “The Highway Safety Act of 1966”[2] with an expressed emphasis on “roadway safety”, to “regulate the use of the channels of interstate commerce” and “to regulate and protect the instrumentalities of interstate commerce”[3]; thereby directly, by implication, or de facto effect[4] Congress encompassed all Constitutional rights, modalities, means, instrumentalities, adjudication standards and Constitutional protections governing federal regulations, standards or acts in this field.

...In legal terms it’s stare decisis under any interpretation of the US Constitution et al when a State exercises police powers under the color of federal law, law embodied by Declaration of Independence and Article 1 § 8(1)(3)(7) of US Constitution itself and Congress’ Intent in a federal Constitutional field, the Supremacy Clause et al displaces conflicting inferior federal agency regulations, State’s jurisprudence, laws and the exercise of police powers thereof.

Under our Constitution’s prescripts citizens’ have a natural unalienable right to travel within our millions of miles of transportation corridors that traverse approximately 80 thousand regulatory entities; and the regulation thereof (sic traffic control, vehicle codes and laws) shall not impinge on their rights within these federal protected and regulated travel enclaves and the exercise of police powers thereof shall be fact based with full due process; and since 1990 and 1997 respectively they shall be predicated on actual unsafe acts applying substantially uniform implementation, expectation and beyond a reasonable doubt substantive due process adjudication standards.
...In both instances herein per UVC § 11-802 et al “a person shall not drive a vehicle on a highway at a speed in excess of these maximum limits” clause(s) lacks foundation because it turns on an invented numeric, threshold or a numeric value below the maximum safe speed in itself vis-à-vis nationally recognized engineering tenets, not on an unsafe act.

All laws and the exercise of police powers thereof in this federally regulated field shall be subordinate, fact based, uniform and in substantial conformance because once the law encompassed the entire field in 1966, Congress cannot recede superior authority back to the States if the said adjudication would impinge federal due process rights of the US Constitution et al; Equal Protection, Supremacy, Commerce, Confrontation Clause(s), habeas corpus, 4th, 5th, 6th, 9th, 14th Amendments etc.

...Nor can a federal agency in manner through administrative convenience adopt a regulation or through nonfeasance permit under the color of federal law inferior authorities to deny these rights; and within the USDOT’s statutory oversight authority they have remedy to reign in non conforming practices; and 5 USC 706 gives parties with standing to cause them to compel compliance; separately, individuals retain all Constitutional rights and remedies to plead not guilty when charged with an unconstitutional act or law et al.

...Federal safety interest must be predicated solely on an unsafe act as long as the basis is narrowly tailored and legally valid, ie, real safety, which is in turn based on interference with the Inalienable Rights of others - the Right to Life/SAFETY. - UVC § 11-801 “No person shall drive a vehicle greater than is reasonable and prudent under the conditions and having regard to the actual and potential hazards then existing”.

...The 5th Amendment requires Equal Protection and when the USDOT oversight nonfeasance and intentional[5] malfeasance purportedly sanctions 80 thousand political entities in the US and its Territories to establish disparate standards of expectation, adjudication and fees and fines[6] in a field under the color of federal law, which on its face alone violates the void for vagueness[7] doctrine.

]]>

Was LaHood’s Decree Banning Driving and Texting Illegal?cdornsife@bhspi.orgREALITY CHECKPOINT2010-01-29T04:50:28-08:00http://www.motoristrights.com/blog/files/23f40f053117a9eb5236756179d2e99b-13.html#unique-entry-id-13http://www.motoristrights.com/blog/files/23f40f053117a9eb5236756179d2e99b-13.html#unique-entry-id-13LaHood Grandstands on Driving and Texting with new Decree Banning it, but what are the True Consequences.cdornsife@bhspi.orgDistracted driving, texting, commercial ban, USDOT, FMCSA2010-01-26T14:35:50-08:00http://www.motoristrights.com/blog/files/b9f333f6e0103aae1ae0e9dd8c6367c4-12.html#unique-entry-id-12http://www.motoristrights.com/blog/files/b9f333f6e0103aae1ae0e9dd8c6367c4-12.html#unique-entry-id-12Congratulations: Missouri DOT Diverging Interchangecdornsife@bhspi.orgtraffic flow2009-12-10T09:47:12-08:00http://www.motoristrights.com/blog/files/3504ddafeb5ea604b993722c41a94879-11.html#unique-entry-id-11http://www.motoristrights.com/blog/files/3504ddafeb5ea604b993722c41a94879-11.html#unique-entry-id-11By the Numbers: Gross safety distortions go mainstream.cdornsife@bhspi.orgREALITY CHECKPOINT2009-09-17T08:05:46-07:00http://www.motoristrights.com/blog/files/2e8106562a6524382387e18fd189af00-10.html#unique-entry-id-10http://www.motoristrights.com/blog/files/2e8106562a6524382387e18fd189af00-10.html#unique-entry-id-10
Compare that to the facts: Oregon's crash summary report cites "excess of posted limit" as less than 1 percent of the attributed cause of accidents, and this too is overstated because of the way the data is collected and attributed.
...Exceeding Posted - Statewide for year 378 incidents out of 41,815 reports, or 00.9% of the accidents attributed to speed in excess of posted limit
...Exceeding Posted - Statewide, all roads 35 out of 416 fatalities, or 10.7 percent attributed to drivers or 08.5% of state total
...Or stated in another way, 90 percent plus of Oregon’s enforcement efforts are targeting less than 1 percent of the attributed cause of accidents. Disagree, let's raise it 3 or 400 percent and say 90 percent of their resources are targeting 4 percent of the cause.
Oregon attributes all accidents to driving behavior and none to poor engineering practices, the 30 percent or more where public policy could reduce accident rates.
...As a matter of practice most speed limits in Oregon are intentionally under posted, with most being posted without a study and when a study is done, the postings are often at or below the 15 percentile speeds. Oregon’s procedures and resulting studies are designed to meet the perfunctory requirements of their non-conforming laws, for the uninformed, not the safety or due process needs of the public.
]]>Essential Material For Ticket Camera Activistscdornsife@bhspi.orgred light cameras, enforment traps, unsafe practices2009-09-12T10:28:16-07:00http://www.motoristrights.com/blog/files/e1e792b8279f0e7685f6e8b8bc0fd0cf-9.html#unique-entry-id-9http://www.motoristrights.com/blog/files/e1e792b8279f0e7685f6e8b8bc0fd0cf-9.html#unique-entry-id-9Portland Oregon PD, an agency without oversight or a conscience, facilitated by unconstitutional state laws and kangaroo courts.cdornsife@bhspi.orgREALITY CHECKPOINT2009-09-06T20:57:06-07:00http://www.motoristrights.com/blog/files/d6248fd936a470a3ca0ee490b2f5305a-6.html#unique-entry-id-6http://www.motoristrights.com/blog/files/d6248fd936a470a3ca0ee490b2f5305a-6.html#unique-entry-id-6
Since 1988, the local authorities responsible for each roadway segment in the nation have been required by law to do periodic safety audits to assure the safety needs of the public are being met; applying nationally accepted engineering practices; and it shall be documented.
...Compare that to Oregon law, and others, where instead of a fact-based system, its Basic Speed Law has become a labyrinth of invented statutory values, with invented absolute shall not exceed enforcement thresholds, with additional higher penalties for even greater invented speed thresholds.
The object of a study is to determine the prevailing range of safe for condition speeds, to assure that all engineering decisions are fact based for that particular segment of roadway. Oregon simply doesn’t do this, its traffic control, including signal timing, curve and passing exclusion zones etc are based on values that do not meet the safety needs of the motorists.
...Instead, it results in an absolute enforcement value 10 to 15 mph and more below its cursory finding’s safest speed while the extent of the safe range remains unknown; to be used in a court system that does not recognize otherwise safe driving as an affirmative defense.
Which begs another question, if the engineers determine the range of safe for condition speeds for a segment of a roadway, and the state practices are clearly deficient; or non existent because the overwhelming majority of Oregon’s safety decisions are based on invented values and known unsafe practices, how would an officer know what is safe, or not?
...Example, if you go to pass and the exclusion zone is too short for the prevailing traffic speeds, or the signal clearance timing is inadequate, and it gives you a green when known cross-traffic entries are still occurring, whose fault is it?
...To be Constitutional all practices and regulations in this field shall be uniform in application, expectation and fact-based regardless of jurisdiction or state lines; and its foundation and rational must be subject to, and be able to withstand cross-examination while conforming to federal equal protection and void for vagueness protections.
...The laws we need to make our roads safer and assure due process are already in place, it’s called the Constitution; all we have to do is demand that it be applied.
]]>Starting this Labor Day weekend, help us make our roads safer by pleading Not Guilty on every citation!cdornsife@bhspi.orgREALITY CHECKPOINT2009-09-02T15:45:03-07:00http://www.motoristrights.com/blog/files/ee476448133a1ad33945e10066d216d6-5.html#unique-entry-id-5http://www.motoristrights.com/blog/files/ee476448133a1ad33945e10066d216d6-5.html#unique-entry-id-5Declaration of Liberty & Justice for All
‘We the People’ plead Not Guilty…
cdornsife@bhspi.orgREALITY CHECKPOINT2009-08-28T09:01:51-07:00http://www.motoristrights.com/blog/files/4d4ebbe1ea5591e07fdac3230b8ad99d-4.html#unique-entry-id-4http://www.motoristrights.com/blog/files/4d4ebbe1ea5591e07fdac3230b8ad99d-4.html#unique-entry-id-4PSA Most Effectivecdornsife@bhspi.orgREALITY CHECKPOINT2009-08-22T03:39:10-07:00http://www.motoristrights.com/blog/files/4de3831512804d9af066ccce60685a5d-3.html#unique-entry-id-3http://www.motoristrights.com/blog/files/4de3831512804d9af066ccce60685a5d-3.html#unique-entry-id-3NYPD: It's Gona Cost Ya!!!cdornsife@bhspi.orgREALITY CHECKPOINT2009-08-20T10:23:59-07:00http://www.motoristrights.com/blog/files/6e270eac83970ebfdf89f8b038798c5c-2.html#unique-entry-id-2http://www.motoristrights.com/blog/files/6e270eac83970ebfdf89f8b038798c5c-2.html#unique-entry-id-2Is LaHood a Safety Czar, or our new Godfather? cdornsife@bhspi.orgDistracted driving, cell phones, fatality rates, speed law enforcement, National Speed Limit repeal2009-08-18T10:15:00-07:00http://www.motoristrights.com/blog/files/ca69fbd0ac60c9e1f83a9c882ea20baa-1.html#unique-entry-id-1http://www.motoristrights.com/blog/files/ca69fbd0ac60c9e1f83a9c882ea20baa-1.html#unique-entry-id-1USDOT Distracted and Operating Under the Influencecdornsife@bhspi.orgDistracted driving, cell phones, fatality rates, speed law enforcement, National Speed Limit repeal2009-08-12T17:09:11-07:00http://www.motoristrights.com/blog/files/c59edb2852945a9d714d047c7086e8a9-0.html#unique-entry-id-0http://www.motoristrights.com/blog/files/c59edb2852945a9d714d047c7086e8a9-0.html#unique-entry-id-0Drunk Driving Hysteria and the Neo-Prohibitionistscdornsife@bhspi.orgteen driving, MADD, DWI/DUI2009-06-14T10:18:31-07:00http://www.motoristrights.com/blog/files/9c8341625d34dae38a6abec3ef6244ea-7.html#unique-entry-id-7http://www.motoristrights.com/blog/files/9c8341625d34dae38a6abec3ef6244ea-7.html#unique-entry-id-7Oshawa speed trap has a twistcdornsife@bhspi.orgteen driving2008-05-18T10:22:44-07:00http://www.motoristrights.com/blog/files/0c84bde3afad00d3961847b75ae0fc6d-8.html#unique-entry-id-8http://www.motoristrights.com/blog/files/0c84bde3afad00d3961847b75ae0fc6d-8.html#unique-entry-id-8

...The idea was the brainchild of Durham officer Keith Richards, whose experience as a traffic safety co-ordinator in Clarington four years ago told him speeding tickets don't work.
...The program, however, is used infrequently because other officers prefer to have "tangible evidence" of stopping offenders, said Richards, who now works as diversity co-ordinator on the force.]]>